Sin

halbhh said:

"Read more carefully" isn't at all a put down to me. I consider it friendly if someone says it to me, unless they are clearly unfriendly by other indications.

You asked about what i already answered tho in that post you were responding to; have a look:

When you say:


Then perhaps you didn't see (or perhaps it wasn't clear?) this --

(bolding added)

The advice about hair is actually just and only (and nothing else except) advice to be modest instead of ostentatious.

The exact same thing applies to every aspect of being modest: clothes, makeup, demeanor, and so on. Hair is merely one possible example in a given culture/time/place.

Today in America the best current example would not be hair typically (of for only a few perhaps), but instead something like overly fancy/expensive clothing.

Click to expand...

The hair thing, AS I SAID, is just one I chose (to not be tiresomewithva whole lidt) with a whole list of things from ye capricious and arbitrary God that have no connection at all to what is moral or immoral.

You spoke of sin as a matter of morality.
I pointed out how a list of sins " is riddled with matters unrelated to morality...as do you,
it appears, with talk of the virtues of modesty!

You challenged me to show the harm if belief in "sin" and to my demonstration, you talk about modesty?
As ibsaid tis thee who might st readcwith greater care.

But never mind all that. Do you get what Imsaid about the harm of belief in "SIN", instead of a
a sensible set of cultural norms to live by?
Its how we do things in China.

Trailblazer said:

What contradiction?

Click to expand...

SHEESH!
You said there's nothing physical about ye spirit world yet agree it would have to interact with matter to get a reaction.

Trailblazer said:

What Is the Meaning of the Term, Spiritual?

That which is spiritual is sacred and the concept of sacred is interchangeable with the concept of "holy"-a word derived from an Old English word meaning, "whole" and perfect in goodness. A religious person may be spiritual, but a spiritual person is not necessarily religious.

Spirituality refers to the evolutionary process as it drives us forward, eventually, to perfect wholeness. It relates to the expansion or evolution of consciousness. And, thus all activity-be it physical, emotional, intuitional and so forth-that leads towards greater perfection, goodness and wholeness is therefore spiritual. The scientist working, for example, on a cancer cure is involved in spiritual work, as is the diplomat attempting to bring harmony between warring parties or the artist seeking to create a beautiful masterpiece for enhancing the quality of life.

Spiritual values are qualified by ever-widening horizons, synthesis, growth and wholeness as well as greater vision, understanding and integration.

We know that without the physical sun, the world would be a dark, cold, dead place. Without the Soul-the heart of the inner spiritual wisdom-the inner sun, the world is full of psychological darkness in the form of ignorance, selfishness and separateness.

To continue: What Is the Meaning of the Term, Spiritual

Click to expand...

No I got it

SPIRIT= GOOD
SPIRITUALITY= TRYINGTO BE GOOD
SPIRITUAL VALUES=GOOD STUFF
EXISTENCE-GOOD= BAD.

Audie said:

The hair thing, AS I SAID, is just one I chose (to not be tiresomewithva whole lidt) with a whole list of things from ye capricious and arbitrary God that have no connection at all to what is moral or immoral.

You spoke of sin as a matter of morality.
I pointed out how a list of sins " is riddled with matters unrelated to morality...as do you,
it appears, with talk of the virtues of modesty!

You challenged me to show the harm if belief in "sin" and to my demonstration, you talk about modesty?
As ibsaid tis thee who might st readcwith greater care.

But never mind all that. Do you get what Imsaid about the harm of belief in "SIN", instead of a
a sensible set of cultural norms to live by?
Its how we do things in China.

Click to expand...

There's just nothing "capricious and arbitrary" about globally recognized virtues like being humble or modest.

Do you agree? Were you really thinking of some other thing (instead of the universally recognized virtue of modesty)?

halbhh said:

There's just nothing "capricious and arbitrary" about globally recognized virtues like being humble or modest.

Do you agree? Were you really thinking of some other thing (instead of the universally recognized virtue of modesty)?

Click to expand...

I JUST GAVE ONE EXAMPLE THINKING YOU KNEW THE KINDS OF TNINGS THST ARE "SINS" IN CHRISTIANLAND.

Here are a few more.

Cutting my hair
Having a drinking party
cohabiting with my boyfriend
Complaining
Debate
Divorce
Silliness
Heresy
Idolatry
Making others laugh
Sedition
Swesring an oath in court
Unbelief

From, official list of sins, new testament

Perhaps you find all these to be immoral
Nothing capricious or arbitrary.
Or that the USA is not founded on the Sin ofvSedition
And nothing sexist

Audie said:

I JUST GAVE ONE EXAMPLE THINKING YOU KNEW THE KINDS OF TNINGS THST ARE "SINS" IN CHRISTIANLAND.

Here are a few more.

Cutting my hair
Having a drinking party
cohabiting with my boyfriend
Complaining
Debate
Divorce
Silliness
Heresy
Idolatry
Making others laugh
Sedition
Swesring an oath in court
Unbelief

From, official list of sins, new testament

Perhaps you find all these to be immoral
Nothing capricious or arbitrary.
Or that the USA is not founded on the Sin ofvSedition
And nothing sexist

Click to expand...

Thank you!!! Seriously. This really helps.

Lemme quickly note which are genuinely meant in the New Testament, and valid:

Cutting my hair (not actually about that, but about doing stuff to draw too much attention to oneself -- but we also learn in the New Testament all fall short, all are sinners, and all stumble, and we tolerate imperfections all the time, with love)
Having a drinking party (Jesus made a lot of extra wine for one famous party, early on, and often shared wine with others; so this one is the opposite; but routine drunkenness in contrast on the other hand (other extreme) is an obvious wrong (even if you're not religious))
cohabiting with my boyfriend (depends on precisely what that means: is it a committed relationship, or just people using each other cynically with plans to move on (the later being wrong, the former being marriage in all but superficial recognition)
Complaining (what? did someone say it's a sin to complain in any way. Of course it can be a sin to complain in a way that degrades and harms other people, such as false witness for example, gossip, and so on, ways of harming others with ill intent)
Debate (?? here I wondered if you were pulling my leg, then I figured out what you are thinking of. First, there is tons of debate in the New Testament (such as Paul confronting Peter, etc.). But we are as Christians to live in harmony: we can discuss all we need, but we are not to be self seeking and contentious and argue in an unfriendly way; we are not to replace peace with arguing over things that are not crucial)
Divorce (is allowed, though often occurs from someone being unforgiving(!) (not a trivial matter itself!), and you should not dump your spouse just to get a new one you lusted after, etc.)
Silliness (oh, contraire!; but, of course, as with anything, it can be for good or for ill; silliness or humor that is loving or unhurtful is fine; humor meant to harm or degrade isn't)
Heresy (? not quite sure what you mean; one example of genuine heresy might be denying Christ is from God)
Idolatry (of course wrong always. It's anything one makes their real god they put all their real love and devotion into)
Making others laugh (see silliness above)
Sedition (yup; Christians should not to get caught up in worldly political conflicts to the extent of fighting/attacking/reviling/etc.)
Swesring an oath in court (yes. a quandary I haven't faced, but I'd be a conscientious objector)
Unbelief (do you mean if someone lacks faith? that is tolerated in most churches, because we think of the church as additionally being also a place to also spread the gospel)

Audie said:

SHEESH!
You said there's nothing physical about ye spirit world yet agree it would have to interact with matter to get a reaction.

Click to expand...

No, spirit communicators (mediums) who live in this world would have to interact (communicate) with spirits in the spiritual world.

Trailblazer said:

No, spirit communicators (mediums) who live in this world would have to interact (communicate) with spirits in the spiritual world.

Click to expand...

I see. That is the only point of contact or
effect?

Audie said:

I see. That is the only point of contact or
effect?

Click to expand...

Pretty much.

Trailblazer said:

Pretty much.

Click to expand...

No burning bush huh.

Audie said:

No burning bush huh.

Click to expand...

No, not a real bush. That was symbolic.

Trailblazer said:

Man was made in the image of God so man is capable of being perfect but only God is perfect. Any man who was perfect would not sin, but you said all men are sinners.

Click to expand...

Man was made in God's image. So you agree with the Bible on that.
Where does it say only God is perfect? Did you see that in the same Bible? Where exactly, please.
Did Jesus not say this...
Matthew 5:48 Be perfect, therefore, as your Heavenly Father is perfect."
Matthew 19:21 Jesus told him, "If you want to be perfect, go, sell your possessions and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven. Then come, follow Me."

Trailblazer said:

King James Version
Genesis 6:9 These are the generations of Noah: Noah was a just man and perfect in his generations, and Noah walked with God.

Click to expand...

So the Bible says Noah was perfect. It also says Job was perfect.Job 1:1
The Bible also says how one is perfect - Genesis 17:1 When Abram was ninety-nine years old, the LORD appeared to him and said, "I am God Almighty. Walk before Me and be blameless.
Hence, as said in the OP, God is the one who sets the standard for one to be perfect.

Trailblazer said:

By the way, Baha'is believe that Noah was a Prophet and a Manifestation of God, so He was a perfect man.

Click to expand...

Please explain what you mean by 'a perfect man'.

Trailblazer said:

Yes, it is accurate.

Baha'is are not divided, we just have differing opinions about the Bible, but we do not have different beliefs regarding the Bahai Faith so we are not divided the way Christians are divided over Christianity's beliefs. For example, all Baha'is believe the same things about the human soul and the spiritual world and what will happen when we die, and we all believe that Baha'u'llah was a Manifestation of God and we all believe in the other Manifestations of God such as Moses, Jesus and Muhammad. Very importantly, it is because we all adhere to the Covenant of Baha'u'lalh that we are not divided and never will be:

Click to expand...

If I believe the Bible is wholly and indisputably the word of God, and you disagree, we are not divided? We are Trailblazer. What are you telling me at all.
If I believe Jesus is the Messiah, and you don't, we are divided.

Trailblazer said:

The Bahá’í Faith began with the mission entrusted by God to two Divine Messengers—the Báb and Bahá’u’lláh. Today, the distinctive unity of the Faith They founded stems from explicit instructions given by Bahá’u’lláh that have assured the continuity of guidance following His passing. This line of succession, referred to as the Covenant, went from Bahá’u’lláh to His Son ‘Abdu’l-Bahá, and then from ‘Abdu’l-Bahá to His grandson, Shoghi Effendi, and the Universal House of Justice, ordained by Bahá’u’lláh. A Bahá’í accepts the divine authority of the Báb and Bahá’u’lláh and of these appointed successors.

Bahá’u’lláh and His Covenant | What Bahá’ís Believe

We do believe the Bible is God's testimony because that is what Baha'u'llah wrote, but that does not mean it is God who wrote the Bible; it was men who wrote it, mean who were inspired by the Holy Spirit. Moreover. just because we believe it n the Bible that does not mean we believe everything is literally true, some of it is figurative.

Click to expand...

This has nothing to do with literal or figurative.
The Bible says, "men spoke from God as they were moved by holy spirit." (2 Peter 1:21) . . .. .All Scripture is inspired of God. . .(2 Timothy 3:16)
No one says God wrote anything, but men wrote guided by God, which makes God the author, and men the secretaries.
So the Bible is God's word to man.
If one believes that, and another disagrees, they are divided.
If you believe the Bible is God's word, you do not give that impression at all, by what you say... especially when you say the negative things you say about it.

Trailblazer said:

I certainly will speak for myself. It is completely illogical to say that just because Jesus warned us there would be false prophets Baha'u'llah was a false prophet. It is so illogical. If you do not know why I will explain it to you. There have been many false prophets and that is why Jesus warned us there would be false prophets. But just because there were many false prophets that does not mean all prophets are false, and it does not mean that there would not be one true prophet.

Click to expand...

Did I say that just because "Jesus warned us there would be false prophets Baha'u'llah was a false prophet"? See what your logic led you to? An illogical conclusion.

I said,
They [Bahais] don't even agree on the Bible. So how can their claim that Bahaullah is a manifestation and messenger of God, be true.
We know of God's dealings with Israel from the Bible, and Moses' writings, so if you do not appreciate the Bible as God's word, your foundation evidently seems very weak.
Would that not clearly reveal Bahaulla's origin? (Matthew 7:15 ; Matthew 24:11)

In other words, if what we know to be true, is from the Bible, and at one end of the spectrum there are Bahais who assume the uncritical evangelical or fundamentalist-Christian view that the Bible is wholly and indisputably the word of God, but at the other end are Bahá'ís attracted to the liberal, scholarly conclusion that the Bible is no more than a product of complex historical and human forces.
What Biblical evidence can they point to, that Bahaullah is a manifestation of God?
I pointed to what Jesus said, not only based on the above, but other reasons also.
What Biblical evidence can you point to, if the Bible is an incoherent complex product of humans?

Trailblazer said:

That is like someone saying that you should not buy a car from a certain car dealer because he has a lot of junky cars, but that does not mean there are no good cars at that car dealer. There might be one really good car. This is logic 101 stuff so when Christians repeatedly cite those verses to mean that Baha'u'llah has to be a false prophet I have to conclude that Christians lack logical abilities; either that or they have been taught so well by the Church that Jesus is the only way and nobody could ever come after Him so they cannot even see the biblical prophecies that clearly demonstrate that Baha'u'llah was the return of Christ and the Messiah.

Click to expand...

Well if a car dealer has a lot of junky cars, logic tells me that those good looking cars in his lots, could well be, and most likely are junky cars with a nice paint job.
Logic tells me that any smart car dealer would not want to be "caught dead" with a lot of junky cars in display of potential buyers.
It would be, "Okay car dealer. See ya." As I apply gas to my better than junky car, in search of the next nearest car dealer.

Trailblazer said:

To say that some prophets are false therefore all prophets are false is called the Fallacy of Hasty Generalization:

Click to expand...

Who said that? Your logic. Faulty logic.

Trailblazer said:

Hasty generalization is an informal fallacy of faulty generalization by reaching an inductive generalization based on insufficient evidence—essentially making a hasty conclusion without considering all of the variables.

Hasty generalization usually shows this pattern

1. X is true for A.
2. X is true for B.
3. Therefore, X is true for C, D, etc.

For example, if a person travels through a town for the first time and sees 10 people, all of them children, they may erroneously conclude that there are no adult residents in the town.

Faulty generalization - Wikipedia

So if a person sees 100 false prophets he might erroneously conclude that there is no such thing as a true prophet.

Click to expand...

Uh. Wow. That was a long winded waste of type.
I hope you got some rest afterwards. I really mean that.

Trailblazer said:

It should remind you of that because those verses are clearly symbolic. I mean nobody ever literally ate the flesh of Jesus or drank His blood.

The Adam and Eve story does make logical sense when utilized correctly. It is when it is believed as a true story and certain conclusions are drawn that it makes no sense. For example, to believe that humans were created to be immortal and live in the same body forever on earth, and if Adam and Eve had not eaten the apple everyone would have lived forever on earth in the same body in a paradise, is the biggest fantasy ever hoisted on an unsuspecting humanity. And because people believe that they draw other beliefs from it that are fantastical, like bodies rising from graves and living on earth forever when Jesus returns.

Click to expand...

First of all, the Bible spoke of Adam dying only if he ate from the forbidden tree. What would that mean? That he would not die, if he ate not from the forbidden tree.

Second, the Bible there, said nothing about immortality. Rather. it spoke of living for ever.
(Genesis 3:22) . . .in order that he may not put his hand out and take fruit also from the tree of life and eat and live forever. . .
So yes God's will for man was that he live forever ... on planet earth, which God made for man, and settled him.

(Isaiah 45:18) For this is what Jehovah says, The Creator of the heavens, the true God, The One who formed the earth, its Maker who firmly established it, Who did not create it simply for nothing, but formed it to be inhabited:. . .

(Psalm 115:16) As for the heavens, they belong to Jehovah, But the earth he has given to the sons of men.

(Psalm 37:29) The righteous will possess the earth, And they will live forever on it.

Oh look! The Bible says God made the earth for man, and they will live on it forever. How illogical the Bible is.
Then you say you believe the Bible... Which one. The one none of us possesses?

Third, the Bible does not say anything about an apple in the book of Genesis.

Fourth, the account of Adam and Eve, is verified, and confirmed as a true account in history, both in the Tanakh, and the Christian Greek scripture.

(Genesis 5:1-5) 1 This is the book of Adam’s history. In the day that God created Adam, he made him in the likeness of God. 2 Male and female he created them. On the day they were created, he blessed them and named them Man. 3 Adam lived for 130 years and then became father to a son in his likeness, in his image, and he named him Seth. 4 After becoming father to Seth, Adam lived for 800 years. And he became father to sons and daughters. 5 So all the days of Adam’s life amounted to 930 years, and then he died.

(1 Chronicles 1:1-4) 1 Adam, Seth, Eʹnosh, 2 Keʹnan, Ma·halʹa·lel, Jaʹred, 3 Eʹnoch, Me·thuʹse·lah, Laʹmech, 4 Noah, Shem, Ham, and Jaʹpheth.
Luke 3:36-38

(Romans 5:14) Nevertheless, death ruled as king from Adam down to Moses, even over those who had not sinned in the same way that Adam transgressed, who bears a resemblance to the one who was to come.

(1 Timothy 2:13, 14) For Adam was formed first, then Eve. 14 Also, Adam was not deceived, but the woman was thoroughly deceived and became a transgressor.

Fifth, one doesn't get to rewrite the Bible to fit their beliefs because having Atheist friends appeals to them, and they don't want to be ridiculed.

Finally, sixth, I don't believe your responses show respect the Bible, at all.
I think there are some persons who perhaps recognize it's value, but I think fear of man causes them to compromise their faith, to pretend that they are rational and logical human beings, but they end up demonstrating that they are not logical at all. Instead they throw reason out the door... all because why, they want to curry favor with the godless.
It's quite evident, that doesn't work.

So in conclusion, what I see, is someone willing to ignore what is clearly written, and trying to give a reason why that is logical.
There is no logic is that.
It's something else, but not logic.

You cannot give any scriptural basis for saying that God did not create his children to live forever in the home he made for them, so you either believe the Bible is God's word, or you don't, and your opinion is what you hold to, rather than the Bible.
Would you like to tell us which it is - not by just saying you do, but by showing which Bible verses deny the above?

blü 2 said:

As I said, ignorance of relevant things is a blemish. You don't want to put your money in a bank if the manager has no concept of right and wrong, for instance.

Eve ate the fruit at a time when she couldn't tell right from wrong. Since God imposed that ignorance on her, no one can accuse her of choosing to do wrong, deciding to sin, since she had no idea what wrong or sin were. This changed when she ate the fruit of course, but the same was still true of Adam when he ate the fruit ─ he too was incapable of wrong, of sin.

And sin, the fall of man, death entering the world, are nowhere in the text. No, God is quite frank about why he kicked them out ─

Genesis 3:22 Then the LORD God said, "Behold, the man has become like one of us, knowing good and evil; and now, lest he put forth his hand and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever" ─ 23 therefore the LORD God sent him forth from the garden of Eden, to till the ground from which he was taken.
​

If we consider Eve to be, as the story says, the first female H sap sap, then her having testicles and lacking ovaries would be a major design fault / blemish / imperfection, yes.

The God of the Garden story is a long long way from perfect ─ his untrue claim that if you ate from the tree you'd die the same day (2:17), and changing his story about the tree from Don't eat from it, it'll kill you (2:17), to Don't eat from it because I said so (3:11), and from his petty, vindictive, Trumplike punishment of Eve, that thereafter human birth should be painful (3:16), and of course his ignoble motive for kicking them out (above, 3:22-23).

That last bit isn't in the story ─ in particular they were never told, Don't make your own choices ─ but if it were, it would underline their innocence of the charge.

Nope. Each was incapable of that when each ate the fruit.

If there's one thing the story is perfectly clear about, it's that they did NOT and could NOT know it was wrong to eat the fruit.

I'm not defending the NT. I'm defending the Garden story against the NT. It does NOT say what Christians keep wanting it to say. Paul can't change that. Augustine of Hippo can't change that. Nor you nor I can change that. It is simply so.

Click to expand...

If you say you are sticking to the story, you need to be able to show me where in the story does it say Adam and Eve couldn't tell right from wrong. I never read that.
Also, it would help if you explain how one can tell right from wrong.

nPeace said:

If you say you are sticking to the story, you need to be able to show me where in the story does it say Adam and Eve couldn't tell right from wrong. I never read that.

Click to expand...

Check out Genesis 2:17 and 3:5 and 3:7 and 3:22.

nPeace said:

Also, it would help if you explain how one can tell right from wrong.

Click to expand...

Human morality comes from a number of sources. Having evolved as gregarious primates, we dislike the one who harms, we like fairness and reciprocity, we respect authority, we're loyal to the group, and we get a sense of self-worth through self-denial. We're also mammals so we have instincts in favor of child nurture and protection. The rest of our morality we get from our upbringing, culture, education and experience. Genetically we're also equipped with a conscience, and with a capacity for empathy. Thus equipped we can decide what's the proper thing to do and not to do ─ right and wrong.

But of course, in the story, Adam and Eve can't do this ─ not anyway till they eat the fruit.

And you have to admit it's a good thing ─ a seriously brilliant thing ─that Eve did, bringing us humans knowledge of good and evil, even if she only did it in a story.

blü 2 said:

Check out Genesis 2:17 and 3:5 and 3:7 and 3:22.

Click to expand...

(Genesis 2:17) But as for the tree of the knowledge of good and bad, you must not eat from it, for in the day you eat from it you will certainly die.”
(Genesis 3:5) For God knows that in the very day you eat from it, your eyes will be opened and you will be like God, knowing good and bad.”
(Genesis 3:7) Then the eyes of both of them were opened, and they realized that they were naked. So they sewed fig leaves together and made loin coverings for themselves.
(Genesis 3:22) Jehovah God then said: “Here the man has become like one of us in knowing good and bad. Now in order that he may not put his hand out and take fruit also from the tree of life and eat and live forever,. . .

None of those verses says Adam and Eve couldn't tell right from wrong.

blü 2 said:

Human morality comes from a number of sources. Having evolved as gregarious primates, we dislike the one who harms, we like fairness and reciprocity, we respect authority, we're loyal to the group, and we get a sense of self-worth through self-denial. We're also mammals so we have instincts in favor of child nurture and protection. The rest of our morality we get from our upbringing, culture, education and experience. Genetically we're also equipped with a conscience, and with a capacity for empathy. Thus equipped we can decide what's the proper thing to do and not to do ─ right and wrong.

But of course, in the story, Adam and Eve can't do this ─ not anyway till they eat the fruit.

And you have to admit it's a good thing ─ a seriously brilliant thing ─that Eve did, bringing us humans knowledge of good and evil, even if she only did it in a story.

Click to expand...

How can one tell right from wrong?
I don't get your answer from that long bit of information.
You are talking about deciding, I am talking about knowing. Those are two different things.
Was your answer, by Eve eating the fruit?
I don't understand. How can eating a fruit tell you right from wrong.

nPeace said:

None of those verses says Adam and Eve couldn't tell right from wrong.

Click to expand...

They say that until Eve and Adam ate the fruit of the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil ─ can you detect a suspicion of a clue in the name of the tree? ─ Adam and Eve had no knowledge of good and evil.

nPeace said:

How can one tell right from wrong?
I don't get your answer from that long bit of information.

Click to expand...

In the usual way ─ by exercising one's judgment against the background of human morality that I gave you.

nPeace said:

You are talking about deciding, I am talking about knowing.

Click to expand...

Plainly, unambiguously, with great clarity, the Garden story says that until Eve and Adam ate the fruit of the tree of knowledge of good and evil, they had no knowledge of good and evil ─ and when they ate the fruit, "the eyes of both were opened" and they thereafter had what they hadn't had before, knowledge of good and evil.

And you forgot to tell me whether or not you think it's a very good thing for humans to know good from evil, and accordingly Eve is a heroine of humanity. Please clear that point up.

nPeace said:

(Genesis 2:17) But as for the tree of the knowledge of good and bad, you must not eat from it, for in the day you eat from it you will certainly die.”
(Genesis 3:5) For God knows that in the very day you eat from it, your eyes will be opened and you will be like God, knowing good and bad.”
(Genesis 3:7) Then the eyes of both of them were opened, and they realized that they were naked. So they sewed fig leaves together and made loin coverings for themselves.
(Genesis 3:22) Jehovah God then said: “Here the man has become like one of us in knowing good and bad. Now in order that he may not put his hand out and take fruit also from the tree of life and eat and live forever,. . .

None of those verses says Adam and Eve couldn't tell right from wrong.


How can one tell right from wrong?
I don't get your answer from that long bit of information.
You are talking about deciding, I am talking about knowing. Those are two different things.
Was your answer, by Eve eating the fruit?
I don't understand. How can eating a fruit tell you right from wrong.

Click to expand...

I have never fully understood that verse (Genesis 3:7). Why would the only people on earth be overwhelmed by the recognition that they were naked? Especially a man and woman that were partnered. I do not see nudity as a sin. It is what I am thinking when I see a nude woman that is the sin. At least if the woman is not my wife. I suppose a man can have those thoughts for a wife. But even if she is not, is finding her attractive a sin or for a woman to find a nude man's physique pleasing a sin?

As usual, I am confused by your questions. Or perhaps it is just that your style is very confusing by design or fault. Does the Bible not say that eating the fruit of that tree will let Adam and Eve know good from bad? You quote it yourself.

nPeace said:

Man was made in God's image. So you agree with the Bible on that.
Where does it say only God is perfect? Did you see that in the same Bible? Where exactly, please.
Did Jesus not say this...
Matthew 5:48 Be perfect, therefore, as your Heavenly Father is perfect."
Matthew 19:21 Jesus told him, "If you want to be perfect, go, sell your possessions and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven. Then come, follow Me."

Click to expand...

Those verses do not say that man is perfect, they are just Jesus enjoining is to strive to be more like God, since we are made in God's image.

nPeace said:

So the Bible says Noah was perfect. It also says Job was perfect.Job 1:1
The Bible also says how one is perfect - Genesis 17:1 When Abram was ninety-nine years old, the LORD appeared to him and said, "I am God Almighty. Walk before Me and be blameless.
Hence, as said in the OP, God is the one who sets the standard for one to be perfect.

Click to expand...

Jesus was a perfect man, and that is what Son of man symbolizes:


God does not expect anyone to be perfect because that is impossible. No human being can ever be perfect.

nPeace said:

Please explain what you mean by 'a perfect man'.

Click to expand...

A Manifestation of God like Jesus is a perfect man because He is sinless.

nPeace said:

If I believe the Bible is wholly and indisputably the word of God, and you disagree, we are not divided? We are Trailblazer. What are you telling me at all.
If I believe Jesus is the Messiah, and you don't, we are divided.

Click to expand...

That’s right, Christians are divided from Baha’is by our differing beliefs.

Baha’is vary in their views of the Bible and so do Christians so that is not what divides us. What divides us is that we believe that Christ has returned in the person of Baha’u’llah and that he is the Messiah, whereas Christians believe that Jesus the same man is going to return and be the Messiah.

nPeace said:

This has nothing to do with literal or figurative.
The Bible says, "men spoke from God as they were moved by holy spirit." (2 Peter 1:21) . . .. .All Scripture is inspired of God. . .(2 Timothy 3:16)
No one says God wrote anything, but men wrote guided by God, which makes God the author, and men the secretaries.
So the Bible is God's word to man.
If one believes that, and another disagrees, they are divided.
If you believe the Bible is God's word, you do not give that impression at all, by what you say... especially when you say the negative things you say about it.

Click to expand...

All this is just semantics. What does “the Word of God” mean? I believe it means that men who were inspired by the Holy Spirit wrote the Bible but that is still not the same as if God had written it. I mean Christians believe that are all inspired by the Holy Spirit so why would those men who wrote the Bible be any different? In what way were they different? How can we even know that they were inspired by the Holy Spirit? At the end of the day, this is just a belief people hold. Moreover, except for Paul, we do not even know who the writers were.

nPeace said:

Did I say that just because "Jesus warned us there would be false prophets Baha'u'llah was a false prophet"? See what your logic led you to? An illogical conclusion.

I said,
They [Bahais] don't even agree on the Bible. So how can their claim that Bahaullah is a manifestation and messenger of God, be true.
We know of God's dealings with Israel from the Bible, and Moses' writings, so if you do not appreciate the Bible as God's word, your foundation evidently seems very weak.
Would that not clearly reveal Bahaulla's origin? (Matthew 7:15 ; Matthew 24:11)

In other words, if what we know to be true, is from the Bible, and at one end of the spectrum there are Bahais who assume the uncritical evangelical or fundamentalist-Christian view that the Bible is wholly and indisputably the word of God, but at the other end are Bahá'ís attracted to the liberal, scholarly conclusion that the Bible is no more than a product of complex historical and human forces.
What Biblical evidence can they point to, that Bahaullah is a manifestation of God?
I pointed to what Jesus said, not only based on the above, but other reasons also.
What Biblical evidence can you point to, if the Bible is an incoherent complex product of humans?

Click to expand...

At one end of the spectrum there are Christians who assume the uncritical evangelical or fundamentalist-Christian view that the Bible is wholly and indisputably the word of God, but at the other end are Christians attracted to the liberal, scholarly conclusion that the Bible is not necessarily the word of God. The point is that people differ in their views of the Bible, whether they are Baha’is or Christians.

The Biblical evidence that points to Baha'u'llah as a Manifestation of God is the fulfillment of the prophecies.

nPeace said:

Well if a car dealer has a lot of junky cars, logic tells me that those good looking cars in his lots, could well be, and most likely are junky cars with a nice paint job.
Logic tells me that any smart car dealer would not want to be "caught dead" with a lot of junky cars in display of potential buyers.
It would be, "Okay car dealer. See ya." As I apply gas to my better than junky car, in search of the next nearest car dealer.

Click to expand...

That was not my point. My point was that there could be many junky cars and one good car.

nPeace said:

Who said that? Your logic. Faulty logic.

Click to expand...

No, it is correct logic. If you go into a town and all you see are children that does not mean there are no adults in that town. Likewise, if you see 100 prophets and all are false, that does not mean that there is no true prophet somewhere.

nPeace said:

Uh. Wow. That was a long winded waste of type.
I hope you got some rest afterwards. I really mean that.

Click to expand...

It was a waste because if people don't think logically they don't think logically. However, no problem because I did not have to type anything since I have it all saved in a Word document since I normally post it to atheists and have been doing so for years.
It did not work on them either, because they just don't understand simple logic.

nPeace said:

First of all, the Bible spoke of Adam dying only if he ate from the forbidden tree. What would that mean? That he would not die, if he ate not from the forbidden tree.

Click to expand...

But that does not refer to physical death, it referred to spiritual death. Everyone dies physically because we were created with mortal bodies.

nPeace said:

Second, the Bible there, said nothing about immortality. Rather. it spoke of living for ever.
(Genesis 3:22) . . .in order that he may not put his hand out and take fruit also from the tree of life and eat and live forever. . .
So yes God's will for man was that he live forever ... on planet earth, which God made for man, and settled him.

Click to expand...

No, God’s will for man was not that man live forever in a physical body on earth. That is utterly ludicrous. If man had lived forever on earth how could more humans be born? How could the world sustain the overpopulation? That is besides the fact that the human body was created to wear out and die.

nPeace said:

Third, the Bible does not say anything about an apple in the book of Genesis.

Click to expand...

The tree of the knowledge of good and evil is one of two specific trees in the story of the Garden of Eden in Genesis 2–3, along with the tree of life. ... the fruit of the tree is commonly depicted as the apple, which originated in central Asia.
Tree of the knowledge of good and evil - Wikipedia

nPeace said:

Fourth, the account of Adam and Eve, is verified, and confirmed as a true account in history, both in the Tanakh, and the Christian Greek scripture.

Click to expand...

Oh dear God, there is no way that the account of Adam and Eve can be verified as actual history.

nPeace said:

Fifth, one doesn't get to rewrite the Bible to fit their beliefs because having Atheist friends appeals to them, and they don't want to be ridiculed.

Click to expand...

I do not know where you dreamed that up. I am not trying to rewrite the Bible but the Bible is not a history book depicting actual happenings.

nPeace said:

Finally, sixth, I don't believe your responses show respect the Bible, at all.
I think there are some persons who perhaps recognize it's value, but I think fear of man causes them to compromise their faith, to pretend that they are rational and logical human beings, but they end up demonstrating that they are not logical at all. Instead they throw reason out the door... all because why, they want to curry favor with the godless.
It's quite evident, that doesn't work.

Click to expand...

Who is trying to curry favor with the godless? The Christian faith is not my faith and what mainstream Christians believe is not logical to me.

nPeace said:

So in conclusion, what I see, is someone willing to ignore what is clearly written, and trying to give a reason why that is logical.
There is no logic is that.
It's something else, but not logic.

Click to expand...

This is not about logic. What is clearly written can be interpreted literally or metaphorically. I interpret some of the Bible metaphorically.

nPeace said:

You cannot give any scriptural basis for saying that God did not create his children to live forever in the home he made for them, so you either believe the Bible is God's word, or you don't, and your opinion is what you hold to, rather than the Bible.
Would you like to tell us which it is - not by just saying you do, but by showing which Bible verses deny the above?

Click to expand...

Yes, God made earth as the home for humans to live on, generation after generation, but after we die our body dies and our soul ascends to heaven and continues to live in that spiritual realm of existence for all of eternity. That is the way God designed it from the very beginning, nothing was ever changed by what happened to Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden. That is al an allegory that has spiritual meanings.

The Bible is correct. We do not go out of existence, our spirit is resurrected and passes from one world into another. After our spirit is resurrected it continues to live.


What he wrote above is congruent with the Bible. The body returns to the earth and the spirit returns to God.

Ecclesiastes 12:7 Then shall the dust return to the earth as it was, and the spirit shall return unto God who gave it.

In the other world, which is a spiritual world, the spirit (soul) continues to live and takes on a new form:

“The world beyond is as different from this world as this world is different from that of the child while still in the womb of its mother. When the soul attaineth the Presence of God, it will assume the form that best befitteth its immortality and is worthy of its celestial habitation.” Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, p. 157

“The answer to the third question is this, that in the other world the human reality doth not assume a physical form, rather doth it take on a heavenly form, made up of elements of that heavenly realm.” Selections From the Writings of ‘Abdu’l-Bahá, p. 194